Customer Reviews

The UFO Book: Encyclopedia of the Extraterrestrial

5 star:		(10)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Contrary to what a previous reviewer wrote, Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" is neither biased nor too "thin" to be a superb reference source for someone who wants to learn more about the UFO phenomenon. While Clark is a "believer" in the sense that he believes that not every UFO sighting can be be dismissed as swamp gas, stars, weather balloons, or (failing all else) hoaxes, he is fair to the skeptics and debunkers and does include the explanations they have given for each of the sightings he discusses. And, given the negative publicity that this topic constantly recieves, it is refreshing to read a thoroughly-researched, well-written account of UFOs that at least tries (and usually succeeds) to be fair and balanced. Unlike many UFO books which are written by "true believers" who do little research and who see every UFO sighting as "proof" that we are being visited by aliens, or books by so-called UFO "skeptics" who actually twist or ignore the evidence in order to debunk every UFO sighting and dismiss the topic as "nonsense", Clark openly states in the prologue that both sides need to adopt a little-used three word phrase when dealing with the UFO phenomenon: "We don't know". This book is actually an abridged version of his much longer and more in-depth "UFO Encyclopedia". The "Encyclopedia", which has 273 entries, comes in two volumes, and costs about $(...), is designed for the more serious researcher or ufologist. The "UFO Book" contains some 90 entries from the "UFO Encyclopedia", yet it still covers, alphabetically, almost every major UFO sighting in America since the UFO phenomenon started in the summer of 1947. It also looks at the major theories used to explain UFO sightings and has brief biographies of most of the leading ufologists AND skeptics in the field. If you're a reader with a casual interest in UFOs, or you simply want to purchase a UFO book for your personal library that will give you a good overview of the subject, then the "UFO Book" is simply the best work that's been published...and it will probably remain so for a very long time.

Apparently, defending Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" and pointing out his critic's flaws has turned me into a UFO "zealot". Amusingly, I'm accused of "mudslinging", yet the previous reviewer does plenty of mudslinging himself, calling Clark a "crackpot" who only uses sources from other "crackpots", and this reviewer "lazy". He also didn't respond to many of the points in my other post, but for those that he did, here goes: at no point in his chapter on the Betty and Barney Hill UFO "kidnapping" case does Clark write that he believes that the Hills were abducted by a UFO. Instead, he simply gives their side of the story, the claims of their critics, and the claims of their defenders. That sounds like a balanced approach to me - you present one side, then the other, and then let the reader decide the truth. In fact, Clark writes in his "UFO Book" that the Hill case is "unprovable" and is indeed based on "circumstantial" evidence! Yet this is ignored by the previous reviewer, who claims that Clark's "UFO Book" omits anything negative about UFOs. This statement can easily be proven false merely by reading the chapter on the Hill case, in which Clark discusses both Klass AND Kottmeyer's criticisms of the Hill's story. Of course, the real problem here is that Clark doesn't agree with their criticisms, and thus must be a "crackpot". Klass didn't create his "excuse" for why he criticized the University of Nebraska for holding a UFO Conference until AFTER his claims had been publicized. In a memo written by the administrator who took Klass's bizarre phone call, Klass charged that he "has a personal feeling that...these {UFO} organizations, by publicly questioning the government, lend support to the Communist movement". Klass clearly didn't want to simply complain about there being no debunkers (specifically himself) at the conference. Instead, he bluntly equates "questioning the government" with "supporting the Communist movement" - an absurd charge. Klass also made this charge privately, and only AFTER it was exposed did he come up with the lame "excuse" now touted by his admirers. To use two of Klass's favorite words, how "logical" or "rational" is it to equate dissent with supporting Communism? "Cry me a river", indeed! As for CSICOP's "Skeptic Annotated Bibliography", the CSICOP website clearly states "The Skeptic Annotated Bibliography is NOT sponsored by CSICOP". So, who's being "lazy" here? CSICOP continues to refuse to print virtually anything which is critical of its goals or methods. Just ask noted skeptic Dennis Rawlins, a onetime CSICOP admirer who wrote a hilarious article entitled "Starbaby" (you can easily find it on the web) in which he describes how CSICOP's leadership (including Klass) tried desperately to cover up a "research project" into astrology which was terribly botched due to scientific incompetence on the part of CSICOP's "investigators". So CUFOS, a ufologist group of which Clark is a member, promotes Timothy Good's book in which Good praises UFO "Contactee" and con artist George Adamski? Then why does Clark in his "UFO Encyclopedia" write a devastating critique of Adamski? Could it be that - gasp! - Clark doesn't agree with Good's assessment of Adamski? Apparently the notion that you can agree with a portion of another person's writings and still disagree with other parts is lost on debunkers, who insist that if they can find a single flaw in a ufologist's writings, then he is a "crackpot" who is no longer to be taken seriously. Of course, they don't apply this same judgement to themselves, as the "Starbaby" incident noted above proves. Ken Arnold sighting: the previous reviewer complains that "because there could be multiple explanations, {why do} you have to pick the fantastic one {aliens}"? Again, precisely where in the "UFO Book" does Clark write that Arnold definitely saw an alien spaceship? Can you quote it? What Clark actually does is to tell the story as Arnold told it, and then present the differing sides (as he does in the "UFO Encyclopedia"). It's called "balance", which is something that many UFO debunkers and "zealots" don't seem to understand. Why is it so troubling to debunkers that a UFO case may not have a prosaic, "mundane" explanation? Most UFO debunkers (as opposed to genuine skeptics) fall into what Dr. J. Allen Hynek used to call the "it can't be, therefore it isn't" school of thought. And so, finally, the previous reviewer is reduced to complaining about the layout of the "UFO Book", as if that had any relevance to its contents. The previous reviewer complains that the margins are too wide, there's not enough photos to suit him, and so on, which all very neatly prevents the reviewer from having to write about the book's substance. As to the previous reviewer's claim that the "UFO Book" "has nothing in it", my only assumption is that he's never read it. So far the previous reviewer has claimed that the "UFO Book" contains only "25 or so" UFO cases, when it actually has at least 60 cases, and numerous others are mentioned in broad chapters. He claims that the "UFO Book" "omits anything negative about UFOs", yet that claim is proven false merely by reading Clark's chapter on the "Hill" UFO case. Also, I'm NOT a UFO "zealot". I actually agree with Klass and other debunkers that SOME UFO cases (such as Roswell) are "explainable" in conventional terms. However, I also think that Clark and other ufologists are correct in arguing that other UFO cases are as yet "unsolved" (not aliens, mind you, just unsolved). However, this "neutral" position is unthinkable in the world of ufology, where "close-mindedness" is the norm. As a result the UFO "debate" now revolves around militant debunkers like Klass at one end, and UFO "zealots" like Art Bell and Steven Greer at the other. Jerome Clark falls somewhere in-between these two extremes, which drives debunkers (such as the previous reviewer) nuts. Bottom line: in a field as rife with intellectual dishonesty as this one, Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" is one of a handful of books to attempt (and usually achieve) a balanced and comprehensive overview of the UFO phenomenon. Period.

The book is great. It answers everything you want to know about UFO's, abductions, and Aliens. I found there were more sightings in the state I live in (Michigan) than I thought possible. I personally research the existance of UFO's, and Extraterrestials, and this is the best UFO book out there.

I don't usually write rebuttals, but in this case I thought I'd make an exception. Jerome Clark (and it's Clark, not Clarke) is no "conspiracy theorist". The "UFO Book" is an abridged version of Clark's two-volume, in-depth "UFO Encyclopedia". In that book Clark does mention Phil Klass, Robert Sheaffer, and other prominent debunkers, sometimes at considerable length. He even includes separate bios of Klass and Donald Menzel, the "original" UFO debunker. It IS rare for Klass to do any field investigations or to talk directly to the UFO witnesses. Instead, most of his "research" was done over the phone. As for the "rational thinking" of Klass & Company, in 1983 Klass tried to shut down a UFO conference at the University of Nebraska by privately telling a school administrator that people who studied UFOs were supporting Communism, and that for the university to sponsor a conference of ufologists would be the same as if they sponsored one held by Nazis! When he discovered that the administrator had released a written account of his absurd claim, an infuriated Klass threatened legal action (which never materialized). Robert Sheaffer, another CSICOP debunker, uses dubious sources such as the "National Enquirer" on his website (The Debunker's Domain), wherein he attacks not just UFOs, but Christianity, poor people (whose poverty is "an inevitable consequence of their achievement-hating values"), and "radical feminists" (and Sheaffer seems to think nearly all women are radical feminists). Sheaffer claims that American women have "bamboozled" their men into making "life-destroying exertions" to keep them living in style. Apparently, Sheaffer thinks it's absurd to believe that the government might be hiding evidence of UFOs, but it's OK to believe there's a vast female conspiracy to destroy American men. Go figure. As for the claim that ufologists are in it "just for the money", debunking is now a big business - CSICOP has more money than nearly all of the "pro-UFO" groups, such as CUFOS and MUFON, combined. CSICOP has no ufologist literature listed on their website, so it's hypocritical to criticize CUFOS for not listing debunker literature. As for the UFO cases listed below: CUFOS has consistently charged that the Ed Walters sightings and photos are a hoax. Dr. Mark Rodeghier, the Director of CUFOS, wrote one of the first articles "debunking" the case. There's no need to use the so-called "skeptical" literature on Gulf Breeze when those supposedly "crackpot" fellows at CUFOS agree with them! As for Roswell, Clark NEVER claims that a UFO crashed there in 1947. He simply presents the story (including the 1994 Air Force report criticizing the case) and states that the arguments about Roswell are continuing. Karl Pflock's book debunking Roswell was published AFTER the "UFO Book", so it's unfair to criticize Clark for not using it. The 1890's "Airship" sightings: Clark has been writing about this subject since the 1960s, and he was one of the first researchers to discover that the 1897 UFO crash near Aurora, Texas was a hoax (it was a prank by the local liar's club). Ken Arnold sighting: there have been no less than 14 different "explanations" for Arnold's sighting. One would think that if Arnold saw something conventional, there wouldn't be so many different explanations needed to "solve" the case. And Brad Sparks - whom you apparently admire - had this to say about the debunkers and the Arnold incident: "If UFO skeptics can't come up with one good explanation for a sighting, then several lousy ones will suffice". Cash-Landrum: Clark quotes from the report of Army Lt. Colonel George Sarran, who investigated the case for the JAG and wrote that Ms. Cash was a "credible witness" and that he had spoken to other witnesses to the event besides Ms. Cash and Ms. Landrum - that's far more than "just using MUFON" for source material! Estimate of the Situation: Curtis Peebles writes that General Hoyt Vandenberg rejected the estimate because he felt it didn't make a convincing case that UFOs were alien spacecraft. Clark says the same thing - Vandenberg didn't find it convincing. Exeter: in the "UFO Encyclopedia" Clark does mention Klass and Sheaffer's books in his essay on the case. Falcon Lake: Clark quotes from UFO skeptic Roy Craig's book on his investigation of the case for the Condon Committee. Father Gill Sighting: Clark quotes from both Klass and Menzel's writings on the case. Menzel insists that Gill mistook Venus for the UFO, despite Gill's testimony that he saw both Venus AND the UFO, and Menzel ignores the fact that there were at least 25 other witnesses to the sighting. Klass (typically) accused Gill of simply hoaxing the event, yet he also ignores the 25 other witnesses. Klass came to this "solution" despite having done no field research or having interviewed any of the witnesses, including Father Gill. Dr. J. Allen Hynek, the founder of CUFOS, personally traveled to the Pacific island where the incident occurred and interviewed many of the 25 witnesses. Allan Hendry, a UFO researcher whom even Klass respected, interviewed 6 of the witnesses, and both Hendry and Jerome Clark spoke with Father Gill. The claim that Clark mentions only "25 or so" UFO cases is absurd - "The UFO Book" contains 60 actual UFO cases, and numerous others are mentioned in chapters such as "Close Encounters of the First Kind". The fact that some of these cases are decades-old doesn't mean they're irrelevant (I'm sure many debunkers would like for people to believe they're irrelevant, because then they wouldn't have to give their implausible "solutions" for some of them). I've read dozens of UFO books (including those of the debunkers mentioned above), and I have no doubt that "The UFO Book" is one of the best-researched and most reliable works on this controversial subject. Clark even includes a chapter on UFO hoaxes and con artists such as George Adamski. If your mind is already closed on the subject of UFOs (and I mean pro-or-con), then you'll probably hate this book. But, if you're looking for a good reference sourcebook on UFOs, then Jerome Clark's "UFO Book" is simply one of the best that you'll find, period.

I read this book years ago and found it a very well balanced,interesting overview of UFOs.I chanced to read the reviews here and I'm astounded at the anger and emotion that this book's aroused in some of its readers. The fury and resentment in some of these reviews is difficult to understand. Its easy to see why people would "disbelieve" in UFOs,and Clark clearly and calmly summarizes the skeptical objections to most of the events in the book. However,the response from some readers has been anything but calm-has Clark somehow touched on a deeply held religious or political view? One argument that a couple of reviewers have advanced is that Clark is a "believer"-as if that disqualified him from writing a book! Few people who go to the trouble of gathering the data and then writing an enormous book on a subject will be indifferent to its subject-of course the author of a book on UFOs will have an opinion about them! The livid reviewers who list fault after perceived fault in Clark's book (or more correctly,in his opinions) should consider spending a few years researching the subject and writing a book of their own(which is undoubtedly beyond their abilities.) The real reason for the anger that these reviewers feel is because Clark has the WRONG opinion,and they don't believe that he should be expressing it.

Clarks' book is generally sympathetic to the idea that UFOs involve something unexplained,but he is not dismissive of the skeptical viewpoint nor does he stoop to attacking individuals with whom he disagrees. This is actually an excellent overview of the subject and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in the subject. Especially welcome in this volume are Clark's summaries of the "alternative" explanations for UFOs. Not everyone believe that UFOs are spaceships from outerspace carrying alien beings.

Clark has put every major theory, case, and person into this 1 volume. Opposing views are also included. If you are interested in UFOs, at under $20 and over 700 pages of QUALITY information, you can't go wrong!

This is one of the most comprehensive collections of UFO material I have seen. It is very up to date, including accounts of Heaven's Gate. I highly recommend this book.

The UFO Book provides a lot of information about the most noteworthy UFO incidents. It is easy to look up any particular incident. It provides concise information to answer most questions and compare with other incidents. And most entries contain references for further study. Anyone from serious ufologists to the simply curious should have this reference book handy to get the facts.

Outstanding effort by Clark as usual. Very detailed accounts and many sightings that I have never heard of. His research was outstanding and well written. I find that I keep rereading this one.

Excellent from start to finish, Jerome Clark is the best in his field. You feel his childhood sense of wonder but it affects not-at- all his painstaking critical skills over every case large or small he handles. Some indeed I wonder how he takes such time with. This is ,of course,his UFO Encyclopedia in brief and a great place to begin reading Jerome Clark. You will naturally want to move on to the larger work. You will actually feel compelled to do so and will not begrudge a penny of the $100. plus you will spend . But read this first. I concur with the below writers that to speak of Mr. Clark's "bias" is typical of a mindset which believes absolute and total skepticism the only criteria of objectivity. That is a True Believer indeed !